Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 422 P3D 642 - In re H.A.

In re H.A.’s Empirical Analysis

2017

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
May 2023
most recently cited

3 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Amfac, Inc. v. Waikiki Beachcomber Investment Co. · In the Interest of Doe · State v. Wheeler · 5 Haw. App. 174 - Hong v. Kong · First Insurance Co. of Hawaii v. a & B Properties, Inc.

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[t]he family court's determination of what is or is not in a child's best interests is reviewed on appeal for clear error.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[N]o decree of adoption may be entered unless all of the HRS § 578-8(a) requirements have been satisfied.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Moreover, the family court is given much leeway in its examination of the reports concerning a child's care, custody, and welfare, and its conclusions in this regard, if supported by the record and not clearly erroneous, must stand on appeal.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
    e.g. In re: LI

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.